The relevance of a piece is given by many aspects, including taking into account the "overvaluation" of a parameter; let's say that humans have needs linked to many factors (the 7x24 formula is not spreading randomly).
Bianca wrote:
i believe that synthesis is a quality whose overvaluation is characteristic of our modern days.
Half a century ago it could have been "I cannot say anything more after Auschwitz", in the 1700s it could have been the gallant man ... today it can be synthesis.
It is certainly a topic that deserves great reflection, a question I addressed during the presentation of my latest piece which lasts 14' ... one might ask oneself what 14' are compared to the 35' of Liszt's B minor sonata ...
Let's say that every era has its own times, anyway duration is never an absolute ... it depends on what passes through us "in the meantime"
@Alegozzo Pleasant to listen to, fluid and not heavy. I also like the 'ribattuto' as a choice. This one too, if interpreted by a true pianist, wouldn't be bad. For pieces of this type, playing with dynamics, the pedal, and articulation would be fundamental.
@Frank what would this 7x24 be? Is it by any chance a sort of scheme used to establish precise parameters to follow during the composition phase?
Regarding synthesis, I meant the ability to organize a piece of work without finding oneself in dead ends (the more "successful" pieces, let's say, are those written in a short amount of time, without too many second thoughts).
I think it refers to shop hours, which in the USA are 7x24, and to which progressively different European realities are conforming... the need is to have stores open when customers have time... namely, not during the day. And linking back to the synthesis, if one doesn't have time to go buy bread (assuming one has the money, nowadays that shouldn't be underestimated)... let alone listen to 35 minutes of a Liszt sonata.
(the pieces that are, shall we say, more "successful", are those written in a short amount of time, without too many second thoughts).
One should explain this to Beethoven, who constantly revised his pieces. For me, it depends on the composer... it cannot be a rule that applies to everyone. Surely Mozart had no second thoughts.
Hi Piccinesco, I'm glad you found it pleasant, despite the terrible playback
What really doesn't satisfy me, even if it can indeed be listened to with pleasure, are the poorly balanced structural aspects (by expanding the piece, the various sections might perhaps result in being more balanced and less "unexpressed"), the cadences that are a bit thrown together, and a certain harmonic/melodic disorder in the construction of the phrases.
In short, if one wants to make a short piece, it must be clear and limpid like Frank's, certainly not like mine
Joking aside, I have the merit of a certain cantability and fantasy that often saves the day, but we are always there: power is nothing without control
I think it refers to shop opening hours, which in the USA are 24/7, and various European businesses are progressively standardizing themselves to... the need is to have stores open when customers have time... namely, not during the day. And linking back to the summary, if one doesn't have time to go buy bread (assuming one has the money, nowadays that shouldn't be underestimated)... let alone listen to 35 minutes of a Liszt sonata.
Obviously, it is just my interpretation
If this were the reason, I fully understand the "motivations."
And it's (after all) connected to the times we are living in, everything in a rush, and paradoxically the most recurring phrase is "I don't have time," which very often translates to meaning I don't know how to make the best use of it (for me, that's how it is).
Hi Piccinesco, I'm glad you found it pleasant, despite the terrible playback
What really doesn't satisfy me, even if it can indeed be listened to with pleasure, are the poorly balanced structural aspects (expanding the piece, the various sections might perhaps result in being more balanced and less "unexpressed"), the cadences a bit thrown together, and a certain harmonic/melodic disorder in the construction of the phrases.
In short, if one wants to make a short piece, it must be clear and limpid like Frank's, certainly not like mine
Regarding the lack of balance, I find balance; perhaps that is why I had a good impression.
Obviously you can improve it, but as a first attempt, we are there.
Skipping the pleasantries, I'll get straight to the point
The part that seems most interesting to me is the central progression, which seems to be right in the middle of your style (more so than Fauré's)
As you say, tastes are tastes; however, since you started with a pattern that I don't mind (Chord -- Suspended 7th chord), why not carry it forward even after measure 26? To me, an Ab7 placed there is a bit jarring, especially because of what follows: I would almost expect a C in second inversion (which, however, would have taken you to a key further away from the one you were seeking), instead you present an Ab again but with G in the bass (coincidentally), which dampens my enthusiasm... I would then have looked for another solution after 34... but I know, time is a tyrant
Thank you Bianca for your input, clearly the B of the piece is entirely mine and it can be heard, but my melody is derived from the A (always as in my style). As for the part after 26, on one hand I think the play is nice when it doesn't last long (and another round would have irritated me) and it would have been too predictable... on the other hand, at 29 I want to hear the reprise.
Unfortunately, I didn't understand which lab with the G in the bass you are referring to.
If by after 34 you mean the preparation for the reprise of the A (34-37), I think the tempo rubato has nothing to do with it; it was chosen. In a simple piece like this (as I was saying, aimed at young pianists) even the change in harmonic progression makes a difference and actually always makes a difference. In this case, with the help of agogics, it is also a very refined solution that creates a lot of anticipation compared to the Eb of the first theme (which is re-proposed in the cello register) but also alludes to a hypothetical closure of the arpeggio that closes the B. At least, that is how I felt and sought it.
As always, composition reveals itself as a discourse of choices; the pieces presented are so different precisely due to the effect of this mechanism... very personal.
... ... for our (un)fortune, the Right Choice most likely never exists
I think Bianca is referring to bar 28, but that would be wrong because it's not Ab with sol in the bass, but G7 with appoggiaturas (which, by the way, do resolve). Also in the previous bar which B. interprets as Ab7, I think you put F# to highlight a 6th etc. of C- and not a V7 of Eb. Let me know if I'm wrong
In general, I think B. "reprimanded" you for abusing surprise effects here and there (as you can understand, I don't agree with her)
In general, I think B. "reprimanded" you for not abusing surprise effects here and there (as you can understand, I don't agree with this)
Look Ale, we are always in the same position. The piece is composed of about 60 measures and not just from B.'s measures. This is to say that if in section A there are no surprise effects and they are only used in B, then this very same section will surely result in being "stuck on"... and this is not part of my aesthetics. In reality, I don't even know how much value it adds to the complete piece. To be clear, from my point of view, unity always pays off. So, on the contrary, "special" effects in A? They would be great in B too... especially if more extensively developed.
I was very pleased to see that you joined the workshop; actually, I am a bit behind, but during this period I have some "disturbing" factors that do not allow me to be at my best with comments... and probably also in composing.
I will try to make up for it soon... I know that R. Strauss's piece will also arrive, and then as usual I will share the original, which, as you have understood, is by Fauré.
G
Gassy
Member
Reply 96 by Gassy
Posts
57
Piccinesco wrote:
@Gassy
A me (simpaticamente ovvio), ha fatto pensare ad un funerale, nel senso che leggendo quello che hai scritto, e capendo che può succedere di incartarsi e non riuscire ad andare avanti, unito ad un'esecuzione molto lenta e con queste armonizzazioni, mi ha fatto pensare al "funerale" delle proprie intenzioni, quando non si riesce ad uscire da una situazione e la musica (ne parlavo con Frank) per forza di cose ne risente (ma questo avviene per ogni condizione, anche la più gioiosa, con risultati diversi, intendo di scelte).
Grazie per lo stimolo Piccinesco; ho allegato un altra versione ... sento che praticamente di mio c'è solo un 15% (ma sono le mie note o quasi )...però è stato molto istruttivo. Ma perchè esistono docenti fan cazzisti? Ho imparato più cose in questa settimana che in un anno di corso
Rinnovo i ringraziamenti a Frank
G
Gassy
Member
Reply 97 by Gassy
Posts
57
@AleGozzo
I really like, above all, the "abbreviated" reprise of the theme at 26 (do reb do) proposed in octaves. Perhaps it is a bit heavy on sixteenth notes and I am not very satisfied with the somewhat sudden stop at measure 13, and you persevere too much around the one-minute mark on that melodic turn.
Contrary to what you think of me, it doesn't seem like an unclear work at all; it also has a beautiful cantability...
G
Gassy
Member
Reply 98 by Gassy
Posts
57
@Bianca
Despite the alternation of points that are too dissonant compared to others that are very consonant, in general I find it pleasant... around the 3-minute mark I struggle a bit while listening, but I imagine a pianist knows how to lighten the listening experience in the part immediately preceding the episode that finally arrives. It was certainly useful for me to take a look at your work, also to see another approach to tackling a melody. From the image you posted, you practically took the melody as a harmonic starting point... and then you wrote a piece in reflection, from the material obtained.
I didn't understand what the VI at the beginning indicates.
Anyway, I received a very positive impression
G
Gassy
Member
Reply 99 by Gassy
Posts
57
@Frank
While on one hand Herbert von Karajan used to say that if one is satisfied with the result achieved, it means they set a goal too low, if I were you, I wouldn't complain. Listening to your piece, one is able to enter another "dimension," something that only happens with repertoire pieces... so I wouldn't worry too much about those points that satisfy you little.
I was reading that Brahms, who was Brahms, even said of one of his operas: "At first it was only my music that I didn't like, now not even the title"
Until next time
G
Gassy
Member
Reply 100 by Gassy
Posts
57
@Piccinesco
I'm pointing out that you repeat the mp marking both at 27... and at 28.
It is a piece that requires a somewhat demanding listening for me, probably because it doesn't rely on pleasantness (see Bianca's) or an ostentatious cantability. In my opinion, the most difficult thing to do is to reconcile those Bachian touches with the somewhat march-like rhythm. Perhaps the dotted note during the performance should have been more of a dotted note, in the sense that you follow it as if it were a "simple" dotted note, but I don't think that is what is influencing it. The section with the repeated notes seems too exposed to me (especially the final one); since you are winking at Bach, perhaps you could have played a bit with the counterpoint... I don't know, and maybe I am the last person who should be giving this kind of suggestion. But I feel like something is missing.
In fact, perhaps yours is the piece where I struggled most as a listener (obviously, my personal opinion); for me it's not the length itself, but I don't understand what causes this sensation... maybe, as Bianca says, my ear is atrophied.
I found the idea of putting the melody in the center of the piece interesting instead.
